Problems with US Chess

+1

 And what we are doing now is growing the game?

This player doesn't follow the money, and I know that I am not alone.  There are people who come to my tournaments that have never been to tournaments before, specifically because they can afford mine.  My tournaments aren't big, but they don't have to be.  Lots of small tournaments would grow the game more effectively than a few large ones.

The cost of USCF membership speaks to the larger problem with OTB tournaments -- they're obsolete.  Their demise has much more to do with the rise of the Internet than the loss of Fischer.

Seriously, $34 to join an association that gets me essentially nothing, except the opportunity to pay $30 or $80 to play chess for a day or two.  On their schedule.  For what?  So it's "official"?

Gold memberships at chess.com cost $30/year.  ICC isn't much more.  That includes all the games you can play -- rated, monitored, and free.  You also get automated computer analysis, openings databases, training tools, regular columns, etc., etc., etc.  All on your own schedule, from the comfort of your own home.

Why would anyone join USCF anymore?

I think many people still prefer to play face to face (OTB). There is also the appeal of socialising with fellow chess players/fanatics as well as visiting different states/cities/areas. While the internet is nice it will never completely replace otb chess because there are also many drawbacks connected to net play.... one of the biggest being you never know if your opponent is using an engine or not. Some people actually like getting out of the house sometimes too.  

  ... not sure about that...

I do agree though that the USCF pricing structure is insane. It costs nothing for them to issue a card. It costs them little to tract activity on a rating. Yes, they publish a magazine, and if people want that magazine, they can subscribe to it independently of their membership.

Membership in the USCF should be around $10 a year for a "keep the lights on" account. That would lower the cost of entering a first tournament and might help OTB attendence. Around here though, there's another problem. Most tournaments are either club events and you have to buy club membership or pay an up charge, or their co-sponsored by the state association and you have to buy a $30 state asssociation membership too!!

Really the organizers have it set up so that if someone shows up to play in the largest open tournament in the state as their first OTB experience, they'll have to pay upwards of $100 in fees -- memberships to the USCF and the state association accounting for more than half of that cost.

How many first timers do they expect to play?!

Where did people get the idea that they would get money for playing a game anyway?  It's pervasive in the Chess culture, which is why players will "follow the money".  However, that's kind of misleading.  People who are turned off by the whole culture will leave Chess entirely.  Therefore when someone throws a tournament without a cash prize, it's poorly attended.  It's not really the case that very few people want to play in such a tournament; it's that all the players who would play in that kind of tournament have been shoved aside and have decided to do something else with their time.

There are thousands of tournaments in other sports and games where people play for trophies and certificates.  Is it that our pastime is not so much fun?  We'll only do it if we get paid?

ETA:  The OP spoke of sponsorship in Europe as a source of prize money.  Does anyone understand who sponsors tournaments, and why?

Sandbaggers are the real drawback to large cash prizes in Under 1800 tournaments. The winner always seems to be someone with a provisional rating or a very limited USCF rating history.

...so I get the impression that the situation in Europe is better than the USA?...if so, how is the model different? Do they depend on wealthy benefactors to subsidise the prizes? If so, then the real problem is the lagging interest in chess in the USA...for surely, the highest number of wealthy people in the world live in the USA...that similar benefactors cannot be found suggests that chess is far lower down the totem pole than in Europe.

...another point is culture...the USA is so material driven...that it is hard to find someone to back a project that is'nt low risk...no one backs anything "for the love of it"...they only say they do because it makes them sound good...and they really don't care about the game (...for they don't do anything substantial to prevent cheating)...their only focuss is on "the margin"...

In Portugal the govt supports chess by giving a certain amount to the National Chess Federation every year and I imagine its the same in other western European countries . Chess is considered a "sport" and so is subsidized just as soccer and other sports here are. Ofcourse chess doesnt receive near the amount that soccer does , which I am sure receives the most. On top of that the venues where most tournies are held here are very cheap or even free , which helps a great deal. Most events I play here are not in nice hotels but in schools, gymnasiums, old theatres etc....  The down side of this is while entry fees are low and prizes are often nice you may play in a venue with no ac/heat .... so in winter and summer you suffer the entire game(s). To give you an example I won about $350. here in a 1 day rapid event of 9 rounds and the entry fee was less than $10. !!  Try finding such a ratio of prize money to entry fee in the US and you are not likely to find one. 

NM Reb, are you a chess professional?  Do you make your living playing chess?  

No , and if I tried to I would starve to death. 

I think in Europe, the network of clubs is more developed too.  A German Sportverein might have a soccer section (of course!), a handball section, a hockey section, a this section a that section, and a chess section also.  That might make the chess clubs better attended, if they're seen as part of a bigger organization.  And it could help on the overhead costs, if facilities are paid for by other sports as well.  All equals more money available.  

The whole chess network in Europe just seems more *dense* in a lot of ways.  I've wondered why.  Is it that Europe is just more communitarian than the wild-west US of A.  Or is it something else.

 Games in general seem to be more popular in Europe.  When I have been in Germany, I have seen a wide variety of games in store windows.  Here, you find games in a few specialty shops, and in Barnes and Noble.  Other than that, there are some children's games available, and "party games" like Apples to Apples.

Plus, in google searches I have seen reference to a lot of game tournaments for games other than Chess in Europe.  Stratego in the Netherlands.  Othello in Italy.  Circular Chess and Hneftafl in Britain.  Chess960 in several places, most notably in Mainz.  (Alas, no more Mainz Classic.) 

America is vaguely anti-intellectual.  Sitting around playing games of mental skill is viewed with a bit of suspicion.  There seems to be a lot more openness about getting together to play games in Europe.

Not to mention that instant gratification activities tend to take center stage in terms of recreation for kids these days. (also explains why table top D&D (role-playing games) is dying ... but that's another rant :) )

Who has time to "study" for hours in order to have a more "fun" experience? Try convincing a kid starting out that his "having a good time at a tournament" actually demands prep-time beforehand. 

 I'm not saying players who love chess feel this way in the U.S.A but this certainly seems to be what this game is advertising here. Seen plenty of newbies muster up the curiosity to show up at our weekly club venue but rarely (if ever) make it into our weekly tournament hall. 

 Dallas Chess Club by chance?  I've occasionally clicked on the tournaments there because there's a certain 10 year old there whose career I have been following since I met him in Michigan.  (I once beat him at a club.  His father bought him ice cream during the game, and he got distracted.  I hope one day to be able to claim that I beat a grandmaster.)

If so, you've got a pretty enviable turnout.  I assume the typical weekly event is pretty cheap?  How about the prize pool?  Whatever you are doing, you're doing something well.

I'm one of those unrated, under 1200 players. How far under 1200?  I have no idea until I play in some real USCF tournaments, hopefully beginning this month.

I can watch titled players up to GM, even famous ones, play on the ICC all day in 3 0 and 1 0 Blitz and Bullet. Do I know who is winning? Nope. One will resign, and I have no idea why, because each has the same number of pieces.

Would I pay to watch IM's and GM's play. Nope. I have no idea what is going on. It's like I have never seen the game played before.

Now, I do understand the play at the much lower levels, and find those games to be far more entertaining and instructional.

Last, and I am not trying to plug ICC. Of the games that were really cool to watch, I can download them immediately for free and keep them in my database for future study and enjoyment. One example would be live games from Nigel Short that I watched in real time, etc.

Just finished watching a 3 0 match between a GM and IM in the Sicilian. I'm not sure why they moved this or that piece, but it was kinda fun to watch.

 What's the kid's rating?

the same as yours.